tv Politics Public Policy Today CSPAN September 28, 2012 8:00pm-10:30pm EDT
what do you think? i think nine might be a stretch, but i think five is do-able. that says things about the society we have become. i do not think it is important at all. i am glad to be a small part of it. >> i think on that note, we will bring this to a halt. >> thank you, it was a pleasure. >> see the first of the presidential debates next wednesday, live on c-span, c- span radio, and c-span.org. next, the u.s. senate race debate between deb fischer and bob kerrey. then the u.s. senate race in wisconsin. after that, women reporters talk
about the 2012 campaign. now, republican deb fischer debates it democrat bob kerrey for the opened democrat senate seat -- for the open senate seat and nebraska. this one-hour debate from omaha is courtesy of ketv. [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2012] [captioning performed by national captioning institute] >> the u.s. candidate for senate for nebraska will answer questions from a panel of journalists. please join me in welcoming the republican candidate, deb fischer -- [applause] and the democratic candidate, former u.s. senator bob kerrey. [applause]
our panelists are ketv reporters. each candidate will have 90 seconds to answer. they will be given 30 seconds of rebuttal time. our audience includes guests of both candidates. we ask you to refrain from any displays of approval or disapproval and hold your applause to the end of the debate. we thank the omaha community playhouse for providing this beautiful venue. we begin with our opening statements, one a minute long each, and under rules agreed by candidates, a coin flip will determine who goes first, and that is candidate fischer.
>> a little over a year ago, i began this. >> introduced myself to nebraskans as i travelled across the state. i am the wife of 40 years, mother of three grown sons and a daughter in law. i have been a citizen legislator at the last eight years. i work with colleagues in the legislature, and we have taken on issues. we have cut spending, balanced our budget, and we provided tax relief. that is what we do in nebraska, and that is what we need to do in washington. nebraskans are saying enough. they are ready for real change we need to have somebody there who is going to take the nebraska way to washington, and
i promise that is what i will do. >> let me assure you that i am still bob kerrey. i looked a little different than i did before, hopefully a little wiser. you know me, you know i went to war, came to nebraska and started a business. i was your governor when we had a recession, and we came through for you. i was your senator when the nation had a recession, another large deficit. we got the job done. i am a candidate because washington is a mess. both parties have made commitments that we cannot keep, and nobody wants to do anything about it. i promise to go to washington to change our congress, and i promise to work with republicans to get our budget balanced so we can set a different course. my opponent promises more of the same.
she signed a pledge at that will be very bad for nebraska. i promise bipartisan solutions, and i promise to get the job done. >> thank you. the coin toss determined which candidate will be the first to answer question. it goes to senator kerrey. >> what would you say to people who are unemployed and have given up looking for work altogether? >> we have work to do. washington has not been able to get the job done. we got to have fundamental change in congress. i am advocating a 45-word change in the constitution to have the congress force term limits of 12 years, give the congress permission to ban all outside money and limit what they can spend in campaigns. money is corrupting campaigns
and making it difficult to simplify our tax code, or to get a farm bill. congress has become too partisan and too difficult to do the things that the people want to have done. >> what i would say to people is we need to change the direction our country is headed. we have had over 40 months of unemployment over 8%. in nebraska, our rate is 4%. we have created jobs in the state. that is what we need to do in the united states as well. i have a jobs plan. we need to back government away from small business, need to have government reduce regulations that are such a burden on businesses so they can create jobs. we need to reform the tax code. we need to reduce energy costs. we need to help small businesses to create those opportunities. >> senator kerrey, you have 30 seconds.
>> senator fischer signed a pledge that would require you should pay the same taxes employees pay. under your balanced budget, unemployment would double. i have examined the amendment, and it would double unemployment. >> i disagree. with regard to the buffet rule, if you are going to tax every millionaire, that can run the government for 17 hours. let's look for businesses to create jobs and make opportunities in the state, and we can do it by reducing regulations, by having an energy plan, by repealing "obamacare." >> the next question. >> a question in this cycle is,
are we better at today than we were four years ago? are we? >> no, we are not better off with our economy, with our position in the world. we have seen a failure in leadership with this administration and with congress that is locked in gridlock. we need to send leaders to washington who will make tough decisions. i have shown you that i have been effective in nebraska in taking on tough policy issues. we have worked together, made those tough decisions. that needs to happen in washington and in washington as well. we need to reform washington. nebraskans know.
we disagree on how we need to change it. we need to create jobs. you will hear me say that a lot because i believe that private businesses can create those opportunities, can create those jobs, not government. it is backing government away, away from all the rules and regulations. we need to reduce the corporate tax rate. 35% -- that is the highest among all our trading partners. we need to close loopholes so businesses can invest. >> in the nebraska, i would say decidedly yes. we have record farm income last year, median family income is up.
if you look at the success of agriculture, ethanol, and we have 1000 jobs up there, including great success to bring in another hundred good jobs for our state connected to our success in ethanol, our success in a program that has reduced the cost of fuel and increase our energy independence. in nebraska, we are better. we would not be if senator fischer's plan gets enacted. we need a constitutional amendment. we balanced the budget in the 1990's by making difficult decisions. it got the job done.
we were paying off debt. to oppose a constitutional amendment would be devastating to the state of nebraska, and i ask nebraskans to examine those facts. >> i would ask people to examine the facts and examine our records. we have done well in the state of nebraska. i am very proud that i've worked with my colleagues and with the governor and we passed legislation to grow businesses. we passed the super advantage act. we are taking care of innovation. we have done it in nebraska. that is what i want to take to washington. >> in the tea party debate, it was pointed out in the press that nebraska balanced its budget into 2009 and 2010 as a consequence federal stimulus.
the federal government would not have that flexibility under her constitutional amendment. it will destroy jobs, close rural hospitals, make it difficult to fund the crop insurance bill. it has real consequences, and they are all negative. >> the army national guard soldiers in nebraska had been deployed four times in the last decade. has the war on terror put too much burden on citizen soldiers, and what do you see as role of guard soldiers in the next decade? >> yes, we have had two wars and we have borrowed money from china to do it. we have a story today that talks about the backlog in v.a. claims.
in 2001 we were spending $26 billion in veterans benefits. not only do we impose a disproportionate burden on the people, but don't you think that this has a long tail on it? and it makes it much more difficult to solve our budget problems. it is one of the reasons that the fischer plan will not work. the most decorated veteran, and we met with former g.i.'s, and you can see the look in their eyes. they have problems, and we can help them. we have one of these kids every day who is killing themselves. it puts disproportionate pressure on them.
i am grateful for what they have done, of course. >> i thank our service people, and i thank their families for the sacrifices that they make, for their dedication to this country, for their patriotism. is it a burden? of course it is. they willingly stepped forward and made the sacrifices for us. my concern when it comes to defense is we're headed to a fiscal cliff. we're looking at sequestration. we're looking at $500 billion in cuts to the department of defense. with sequestration, if that happens, that is another $500 billion. we're looking at the smallest army since 1950, the smallest air force ever. that cannot happen. we need to make a commitment to our military. when you have the director of
the department of defense, the secretary, saying this is a bullet to the head, this is devastating, he will take whatever he can get. we're at a fiscal cliff, and these cuts to our defense are at the forefront of it. >> your balanced budget amendment will take the sequester and multiply it by at least seven. the cuts that would be imposed -- hearing slogans in support of the veterans, but the amendment will not support it. neither presidential candidate -- 80% have never served in the military, and when it comes to the time when they come home, it matters. >> i thank you for your service
to our country. but i believe everyone would make a sound decision, and it would be a hard decision any time we send our young men and women into harm's way, and i would take that decision seriously. >> as we know by now, 47% of americans do not pay income tax. some have argued this is proof we have become an entitlement nation. do you agree or disagree? >> i have been asked that since the comment has been made. i have my own views. when i served in the nebraska legislature, i said there are four priorities -- public education, public safety, public infrastructure, and taking care of those who cannot care for themselves. that applies to our federal
government as well. there are people that need help, and government needs to help those people. that is a given, and to make comments on both sides in trying to divide this country and divide the people of this country, that serves no purpose. people sometimes need help, and government should be there for them. >> i have been more careful looking for the video cameras when i am answering questions. [laughter] there is a grain of truth in it. i do not think a social security beneficiary is a moocher or a disabled veteran is a moocher. we have made commitments and we cannot afford to keep them. enormously important programs, but it is a $60 trillion unfunded liability. it is not fair.
fischer said nobody over 40 should not have to pay more. we have got to solve this problem, and i believe that the social security plan i have endorsed, that is the foundation for balancing our budget. it is way too easy to demagogue this. i have listened to obama and romney who have both demagogued and misrepresented the facts. i do not regard people getting government benefits as moochers. if we do not address it, it will not be long before we are greece.
>> the government has to honor its commitments. we need to honor commitments we made our seniors, and that is why i say, let me be clear, no one over the age of 40 should see their benefits cut or their taxes increase. promises were made by government and promises need to be kept. we need to make sure that all happens, and i believe there is bipartisan support to do that. nobody is going to watch social security fail. >> the promises were made to secure the votes of people over 65. since world war ii we have been doing it. it is a $60 trillion unfunded liability, and are we going to solve the problem? will we ignore it? and if we ignore it, god help the united states of america. >> recently at the national convention, republicans called
for a constitutional amendment banning all abortions with no exceptions for rape or incest. where do you stand on this proposal and why? >> i trust women to make that decision. there are a lot better ways to reduce the number of abortions. we got to think about why our law enforcement community -- our working mothers are in trouble. we have to get prenatal care for them. we have too many children coming into kindergarten behind, and if we lose them in kindergarten, we lose them forever. 2500 kids in a program here in omaha are provided refuge that are being sexually abused in their own home. we got to pay attention to them, and we got to help them
and the moms and the community leaders who are trying to help this problem. i do not think we should regulate women in making these decisions. it does not stop there. there is lots more that needs done to make sure that that children have a fair and decent opportunity to live to their full potential. >> i am pro life. i believe in the sanctity of life. i believe there should be an exception made for the life of the mother. what we are looking at is an economy that is hurting families. we're looking at an economy that tends to hurt women more. the situation we're in the last four years, it is hurting women. women are not able to find jobs. they have seen decreases in their pay. when need to help families by having jobs created so they can provide for their families, said they can save for college.
when it comes to decisions on life, i am pro life. >> there is a lot more ways to be pro life than to say women cannot make their own reproductive decisions, up to and including that they have to prove that they were forcibly raped. she voted against providing prenatal care. it was not undocumented. we have got to take care of these kids and we cannot just give slogans. we have to put more time and money into our kids. >> the comments made by the gentleman from missouri were offensive. i cannot support his comment at all. what i do support and what i have supported and we have seen in nebraska are parental notifications, our protections for unborn children. that is important. it was passed with bipartisan
support. >> the next question is for senator fischer. >> one thing i have heard is voter frustration with partisan politics. with that in mind, talk about one current or recent u.s. senator from across the aisle whom you admire and why. >> we get this question of lot. it is important to be bipartisan. i always say to folks look at my record in nebraska. you're not elected chairman of a major committee, you are not elected leadership if you are a partisan person. we have worked across the aisle on a number of issues in this state in taking on these really tough policy issues and building consensus. that is how you get things done. i would hope to do that in washington. before, i have mentioned a
couple times names, senator manchin and senator warner, who have expressed interest in making spending cuts and reforming the health care act, so those are individuals i would look to in order to work with on issues. i believe there is bipartisan support on a number of issues. the corporate tax rate -- there is bipartisan support for that. there is bipartisan support looking at reforming the tax code, repealing the death tax, which we have done in nebraska. looking at repealing the alternative minimum tax. that was set up and as a parallel tax that was trying to capture income from wealthier individuals. it was not indexed for inflation. that is dipping down and hurting the middle class so that one in five people in the middle class are affected by that. there is support for a number of issues including those. >> you can work with me as well.
i support cutting spending. i worked with dick shelby to reform our intelligence structure. rob portman and i worked to reform the internal revenue service. i've worked with george bush and john mccain to normalize relations with vietnam. it was a wonderful bipartisan accomplishment that i am proud of. it is not just identifying republicans. the rules have to change, and i promise you, i believe i can persuade americans to amend the constitution, to allow the congress to ban both outside money and limit the amount of money in campaigns because it is corrupting our political decision-making. we need to change the rules of
the filibuster and reduce the number of committees, to reform the congressional pension. there are many changes that need to occur, not just identifying somebody that i can work with, but who am i going to fight. i will be fighting with mitch mcconnell and harry reid on a regular basis. >> thank you. you have 30 seconds for a bottle. -- rebuttal. >> throughout my adult life i have been fortunate to serve on a number of boards, commissions. i was a school board member over 20 years. you learn to work with people. on a school board you work with educators and people with the community. i have done that, not just in the legislature, but throughout
my adult life, and that is something i believe i have a talent for. >> for those of you supporting her -- i will work with you after the campaign. we have got to change washington. it is not going to work to identify republicans or democrats that we can work with, unless we change the rules of the congress. it will be a fight, but i can believe we can persuade americans that it needs to be done, and i believe i can persuade americans that we need to amend our constitution. >> what do you like about the affordable care act, and what would you change about it? if you dropped the requirement that everybody bought insurance, would it continue? >> i'd like that it is a market-oriented program.
i like that it has decreased the costs of 300,000 nebraskans over their prescription drugs and has increased the amount of money that they can get preventive care and testing. the big moment will occur in 2014. 120,000 working men and women in nebraska -- and you know who they are. anybody who makes 10 bucks an hour or less. they will be able to afford to buy health insurance. from personal experience, they can determine whether or not you can hold a job, whether you can survive as a family, it will have not much of an impact. it will be good for nebraska. i believe it will be good for
the economy. i can identify a number of things that need to be changed, but fundamentally this bill would do a lot of good for our state. >> i want to repeal the affordable health care act, and i believe we need to step forward and go in step-by-step fashion in order to address accessibility and affordability of health care in this country. we need to look at tort reform, liability reform. in nebraska we are fortunate that we have a cap on liability, and that helps keep costs down, because 1/4 of medical procedures asked for are doctors do it because of their concern for liability. we need to look at carrying insurance across state lines. we need to look at making it easier for health care associations to be formed, so businesses and individuals can have a more competitive and affordable health care
insurance. we do not need to have a mandate. we do not need to have a board come between a patient and a doctor. we certainly do not need to steal money from medicare to pay for it. >> senator kerrey, 30 seconds. >> nothing was stolen. all it did was extended the insolvency date of medicare back 8 years. do what she wants to do, and insolvency will occur in 2016. i ask you this question -- why it is political rhetoric. obama and romney are using it. they're all using it. why are there any nebraskans over the age of 65 who are uninsured? the answer is federal law. the same arguments you hear will level against medicare in 1965.
>> thank you. this is stealing over $700 billion from medicare, taking that reimbursement from hospitals. hospitals than expected to make that up. they expect to make it up because the increase in patients that would be on government insurance. that was the deal made. you can talk about political statements, but the fact is, it takes at $700 billion from medicare. >> thank you, senator. the next is for sen. fischer. >> do you think every american is entitled to healthcare, quality health care to insurance? or do you think it is something that should be earned. >> i believe we need to look at the affordability of health care. we need to make sure americans can afford it. we need to make sure that americans have opportunities to have jobs, good paying jobs, in order to purchase health care. as i said earlier, we always need to be cognizant and take care of those who truly cannot
care for themselves. we need to look a pre-existing conditions. i hear that bipartisan talks on both sides. i note that will happen. we can work this out so people with pre-existing conditions are covered. but my main concern is to make it affordable. health care really is not affordable for anyone. you can always get your insurance and whether you buy yourself if your self insured and have a large deductible, or if you're fortunate enough to have an employer who helps to provide you with health care insurance, it is expensive. we need to look at ways we can lower the cost of health care insurance in this country. >> thank you, senator. sen. kerrey. >> that $700 billion pushes the insolvency date of medicare out to 2024. reverse it, it is solvent in 2016. that is not an exaggeration. we having messed up health care
system in my view. i think there's a lot we can do to take the affordable health care act and increase the number of people who have insurance. i don't think she gets to appoint or use a "health care is free -- i don't think you should get to a point where you say "health care is free." we all have to participate in controlling the cost. how far do we want to go? under the current law, what we have is guys like me that the blown up in a war, where eligible for subsidies. i do not recommend it as a way to be eligible, but if you hit the age of 65, if you are poor and medicaid is the worst, -- work for the right employer or for the government. a federal, state, city, school, county, they're all subsidized. if you think about the affordable healthcare act, i would like to see the fed's swapped outk-12 and remove the
burden of medicaid from the state, but also to get to a point where you could really start to use these exchanges as a way to increase the number of people have health insurance, and also facing the true cost of the care. >> thank you. sen. fischer, 30 seconds. >> we learn more and more about the affordable healthcare act every day. as i talked to medical providers across the state, they have deep concerns. they cannot expand because of the uncertainty. we have hospitals that are concerned, especially in rural nebraska. i have a number of critical access hospitals. they don't know what is coming because of the uncertainty that is out there with health care. i always go back to we need to make sure that health care is affordable. that was not addressed in the debate that passed or the non debate that passed the affordable healthcare act. >> thank you, senator fischer.
senator kerrey, 30 seconds. >> i have heard the same uncertainty, but congress can take every single tax and spending decision beyond the election and gets back to the need to reform congress, to change it so it stops during the sort of thing. a lot of uncertainty is born from people saying they want to repeal the law. these exchanges can work. these exchanges are market- oriented. a lot needs to be changed, but we need to go forward and not back. >> next question for senator kerrey. >> solid intelligence reports that iran is very close to testing and nuclear weapon. at one point would you support military action against iran? senator kerrey. >> i have found the intelligence committee for years, the first word out of my mouth is oxymoron. we don't always have a solid intelligence report. we cannot allow iran to acquire nuclear weapons. i don't think is worthwhile to
discuss military options. i understand what the team can do. i understand what our capabilities are. all need to say to iran is, we have the international community on our side and we cannot allow you to acquire nuclear weapons. i will say it again. remember the veteran numbers i gave you earlier. $26 miion worth of pension disability payments in 2001, $76 billion today, going to $130 billion a day. i was concerned when i see two- thirds of nebraskans want to get out of afghanistan and two- thirds want to go to the war in iran. we all get worked up and wave the flag in get patriotic. i was in a war were that was the case. after three or four years we ran out of gas. remember, what happens afterwards? we have to be very careful, making it clear to iran we have tremendous amount of military
capability and will use it if necessary to prevent you from acquiring nuclear weapons. >> thank you. sen. fischer. >> iran cannot be allowed to acquire nuclear weapons, but we have an administration sending mixed signals. with a strong ally in israel. the only democracy in the region. this is not just their problem. it is not just the problem in the region. we're looking at the country of iran where it is estimated in three years they will have icbm's that can reach the united states. this is a concern for the world and for our country. we have a demonstration that has not been clear on foreign policy, and there has been a lack of leadership. in 2009, there were protesters in iran. we heard nothing from our government. in 2011, the government finally stepped forward and we saw some sanctions put in place. i am happy to see european countries have also stepped
forward and into a limited sanctions against iran. but we need to have a strong administration who is going to make it clear that a line needs to be drawn. we have never heard from this government. we have never heard them say that iran should not be in reaching uranium. -- enriching uranium. we need to make clear if we are going to be leaders, if the united states of america is going to be a leader in foreign policy and keep stability in this world as has been our mission in the past, then we need to make it clear. >> sen. fischer, thank you. senator kerrey, 30 seconds. >> i'm not running for president so i do not want to disagree with president obama or governor romney on iran, but we cannot allow them to acquire nuclear weapons. but what happens afterwards? they do not call it the persian gulf for nothing. we got worked up when we
launched cruise missiles in the mid-1980s in libya. the knockout pan am 103. what do we do afterwards? it is not as simple as saying, "we're going in there." i think we up to be conscious of what it means we draw a line. >> thank you, senator kerrey. senator fischer. >> i would reiterate that we need to have leadership in this country when it comes to foreign policy. we have not seen that in the last four years. we're witnessing the turmoil, which i believe is due in part to that. we have seen terrorism in al qaeda resurface in libya. this world is not a safe place. our world has changed in the last 11 years, becoming less safe. if we do not have strong messages sent from washington, and makes it even less safe. >> the next question is for senator fischer. >> it has been said the greatest threat to america right now is is accumulating debt, $16 trillion and counting. social security, medicare and
medicaid are the main problems going forward. what real solutions would you come up with? >> $16 trillion in debt. who would ever have thought that? who would have thought it for years ago? we cannot continue down this path. as i travel the state of nebraska, i hear that from everyone. this is not sustainable. what do we do about it? we get spending under control, cut spending. i support a balanced budget amendment. we backed government away from businesses. if we reduce regulation. i met with some hold builders -- with some home builders in lincoln a few weeks ago. it is interesting because it was not that many years ago when inspectors would come in and say, "you need to change this so you are in compliance with this rule." now they come in and you are fine.
-- fined. this home builder had a ladder leaning against the wall and he was fined $7,000. that is not a way to grow this economy. we have to grow the economy if we are going to make the tough decisions to make medicare and social security sustainable into the future. let me be clear once again. i believe that we cannot change the benefits for people over the age of 40. we need to be honest with our younger citizens in this country. you all know that the programs you have are not sustainable. but if the government is honest with you saying that things didn't change, maybe those under 40 need to look at means -- that things need to change, maybe those under 40 can make plans. we need to have a government that is honest. >> there's a big difference between sen. fischer and myself on this. i have said it is all it back to the entitlement commission in
1994. the problem was bad then and has gotten worse. the commitments do not necessarily mean we can afford to meet them. that is the problem. we cannot afford it. what are we going to do about it? she's basically saying if you're over 40, you will not have to participate in the solution. if you're making more than $1 million a year, she says he will not have to participate in the solution. this is a difficult problem to solve. you saw in the chicago school strike, which i thought was ridiculous, you look at the chicago school struck and behind that is public pensions in chicago. it will be broke in two or three years. they made commitments, too. the problem is, when you keep your commitments, you start laying off teachers and personnel, class sizes are estimated to be 50. the same thing is happening at the federal level. the question is, not are we going to keep our commitments, but are we going to do the right thing for our future?
the most moving moment of my political career was in lincoln, nebraska on june 6, 1994 with men who landed on the beaches of normandy 50 years earlier. we celebrated that not because they avoided risk, but because they took risk. are we going to be remembered in the same fashion? if we do it the way sen. fischer is talking about, i promise you we will not. >> i was not in government when those commitments were made. but i continue as a state senator for eight years, i took my job seriously. when i made a commitment, that meant i was going to keep it. that meant i was hoping the people that came after me and served in the legislature would keep that commitment also. i can tell you what i will not do. i will not cut benefits. i will not raise taxes. i will not steal $700 billion from medicare. >> first of all, your balanced judgment -- budget, i think it
is the wrong way of approaching it. we have a commitment we cannot fund. it is simple math. it is a $60 trillion unfunded liability with $400,000 of debt for every single person in the workforce. we made a commitment we cannot keep. what are we going to do about it? if we do not do anything about it, we will end up like greece relatively soon. >> both of you have said businesses are overregulated. what specifically would you do to roll back regulations? >> that is to me? >> yes. >> you're looking to her and talking to me. >> charming. >> you are charming. what are you doing tonight? [laughter] >> i did start a business here in omaha, nebraska.
the first thing that did do was get a permit from the city of ralston. we had to get a zoning change the city council. i have been dealing with government regulation since 1973. i expressed that was, and senator, looking at whether or not there is a benefit, cost effective. i don't think the business mandate will work. i think we are imposing -- ferc saying they have to do one thing and epa saying they have to do another. they're trying to answer, which law do i break? i personally think it is excessive. there is no question there's cost attached to every single regulation. i like measuring what that cost is going to be. i don't support tying it up, but basically, federal agencies write a rule in advance or instruction before the rule itself is promulgated and has
the impact of the role even before the final rule was done. lots of things i think we can do to decrease the cost of regulation on business. i don't think there's any question it would help us create more jobs. >> sen. fischer. >> i think there are lots of things we can do. my first priority bill the first year the legislature was a bill by senator pat warren who happens to be a democrat here in omaha. i chose his for my party bill. it puts in place here in nebraska a process whereby a citizen can challenge a rule or regulation to make sure it meets legislative intent. so i have always been concerned about rules and regulations. we need to look at something like that of the federal level. we need to use a committee process at the federal level. one senator is not going to be a to make all these changes on their own. but if you use a committee process and look at those rules and regulations that have a certain economic impact, that
is a good way to start. here in nebraska we look at the dust. we have all heard about the farm dust and how really ridiculous that rule was. sen. kerrey mention the emissions of our public power plant that is of deep concern because in nebraska, we're so fortunate we have public power and lower electric rates. it helps us all as consumers, but also helps us to draw businesses to our state, to grow businesses. it is an advantage to come to nebraska because of those rates. you grow jobs. but we have to remember that if you set the rules and regulations, government should be there to help. they should be there to help individuals and businesses. we all want safe workplaces and clean water and clean air. that should be the goal of a rule or regulation, common sense.
>> sen. kerrey. >> at the same time, we have to be careful to not get carried away with our own pro-business rhetoric. i remember the arguments against title 9, against changing the law to make it harder for someone who is drinking under the influence of alcohol and wearing a seatbelt. 75% of the gold medals for women. we have decreased fatalities on our roads. with seatbelts and tougher standards on drivers. >> 30 seconds. >> i do believe in limited government and i believe in personal responsibility. i don't think government needs to be out there controlling every aspect of our lives. that is one reason why i am opposed to the affordable healthcare act, because of that individual mandate. government should not be telling every individual in this country what we need to do and what we should not be doing.
the rules and regulations are out of control and they need to be common sense and need to be responsible. >> next question for sen. fischer. >> very broad question, and i am looking at you. >> thank you. >> no offense, sen. kerrey. do you have fears for the future of this country? >> i am optimistic about the future of america. i am an optimistic person at heart. i believe we still have and we still can become a great country. there is a number of proposals out there that concerns me, as a concern all nebraskans. i have listened to those concerns and listen to those fears as i have travelled across the state. but i still believe that we can turn this country around. i still believe that we can be on the road to recovery.
and it is because of who we are. as nebraskans, we always like to say we are rugged individualists. we are ornery at times, but we are rugged individualists. we make good decisions because we use common sense. we have those core values, set priorities, work hard. we believe in rewarding hard work. we believe in honesty and integrity and keeping your word. those are qualities of every american citizen. so, yes, i am optimistic. i believe we can change the direction our country is headed by putting in place some common-sense rules and regulations by repealing some laws that i believe should not be there, by taking care of our citizens and building a better and brighter future. >> sen. kerrey. >> i am also optimistic. i have been all my life, sometimes to a fault.
sometimes when the terms and conditions told me i should be more pessimistic, it got me in trouble from time to time. i am very optimistic. we have a great system, open and free, and one of the most patriotic statements was from a woman in a acapulco who runs a grocery store in schuyler. she is legal, was to be a citizen. she tells the story about why this country is great. she is free, can do she wants, is safe. i do worry about this balanced budget amendment. it is going to have a terrible effect on nebraska. we're not going to be able to provide the grants are students need or have the research that needs to occur to develop these phenomenal public/private relationships i talked about earlier. you can see what happens with greeting businesses with ability university beside it. these private-partner relationships all around the
university of nebraska medical center are at risk with this balanced budget amendment. so i am very optimistic. i scored again. we have a lot of kids who are in trouble. young kids need more support, both nonfinancial support coming from the not-for-profit sector as well as some of our government agencies. >> sen. fischer. >> i've heard a lot about the balanced budget amendment. maybe i should address that. i support a balanced budget amendment. in nebraska, we balance our budget every year as required by the constitution. we need to do that at the federal level as well. anytime you do not have controls on congress, and spending, on politicians, they will spend every dime they can get their hands on. we need to make the tough decisions and control spending. that is how we can move this
country forward. >> first of all, he balanced the budget in 2009 and 2010 in nebraska as a result of federal stimulus money. 80%. correct me on this in the debate in omaha, but it is not just we have to balance our budget. it is the spending levels in this amendment. it would mean we have to cut much deeper than i think we would have to if we face the fact we made over commitments in social security and medicare. if you're willing to start with those programs and tell grover norquist he can put his plans where the sun doesn't shine, you can do it without having to savage the things we depend on in nebraska. >> this will be our final question. 45 seconds. no rebuttals. >> political candidates or other political campaigns as we know can be brutal these days and appeared be more toxic in the last few years. as candidates, are there things
you have done that you wish you did not have to do to win office? if so, what are they? >> there are trade-offs. the biggest and most difficult tradeoff is the one you make with your family. this puts a big burden on my wife and son. i would not say i regret the decision, but am very conscious of what happens. all of this complaining about how terrible things are, nobody is going to shoot me like byrd did with hamilton. you have to do the work. we have to solve the problem. we have to accept the facts say we have to do things differently regardless of whether democrats or republicans get mad you. >> sen. fischer. >> campaign for this united states senate seat has been a wonderful experience. it has been great to travel
across the state of nebraska to meet people all across the state. we're such a diverse state. there are so many positives out there. nebraskans are friendly, kind, welcoming. so it has been a wonderful experience. it is a little tough on my husband of 40 years that i am not home that much and that he has to take off sometimes and travel with me. but the benefits far outweigh any negatives in this experience that i have the honor to enjoy. >> we move to the final part of our debate with the candidates closing remarks beginning with to address you directly, starting with sen. kerrey. >> thank you to our monitor and --moderator and the participants here in the audience and nebraskans as well for paying attention to this campaign. i bring three things in closing. first, i have a set of experiences i think, in the effective in the senate.
i have been in the military, have been in business, and a disabled veteran. i have been in government. i do not need on the job training. i know how to do this job and be effected. i know how to cross party lines and take grief from my party when i do. secondly, we have to change congress. you have to believe it can be done. i don't the keeking get it done -- i hear that from voters. i think i can get it done. we have to amend our constitution and change rules a filibuster and change rules that govern these committees. 88 subcommittees are responsible for homeland security right now. there is lots of change that needs to occur. the last thing, my economic plan and sen. fischer's plan are dramatically different. i think changing our constitution would savage and increase employment in the state
of nebraska. >> senator fischer. two minutes. >> nebraskans have a clear choice in this election on november 6. there's a clear contrast between sen. kerrey and myself on just about every issue. i voted for and help to pass the largest tax relief package in history of the state of nebraska. mr. kerrey helped to pass the largest increase in our country. i support a balanced budget amendment. he did not in the senate. i would say if it would have passed then, we would not be looking at over trillion dollar deficit today. i do not believe that government should between a doctor and a patient. i support market-based health insurance. mr. kerrey does not. i have a jobs plan so that we can cut spending, but we need to grow jobs to turn this economy around. we need to reduce regulation and reduce energy costs, reform a tax code.
we need to repeal the health care law. we need to promote free and fair trade. that will get as on the road to recovery. we face many challenges in this country. but americans are exceptional people. because we have the talent, the resources, the knowledge and we have the willpower to overcome the challenges. yes, i believe in a brighter future for america. i want to help build that brighter future so i ask for your support and ask for your vote. thank you. >> thank you, sen. fischer. join me, everyone, in thanking both candidates for their participation. [applause] we also want to thank the omaha community playhouse for hosting this important debate. and also, the great omaha chamber for its sponsorship of the forum.
also, thank you to you as well and our panelists for the guests here in the audience. you can review the debate any time on line on ketv.com to help you make an informed decision on november 6. for that next month, ketv will devote a least 12 minutes of coverage every day to the issues and the candidates in this election. thank you for joining us for the second debate of u.s. senatorial campaign for nebraska senate. have a great day. [applause] [captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2012] >> to the first of the presidential debates next wednesday, with on c-span, c- span radio, and c-span.org. watch and engage. next, representative tammy baldwin and governor tommy thompson.
after that, women reporters talk about the 2012 campaign. then secretary kenneth -- secateurs janet napolitano on security. >> i'm a firm believer that this is one of the most -- c-span ar dives is one of the most historic archives there are. i primarily watch the "washington journal," the house of representatives, an c-span2 for the senate. >> jake young watches c-span on wow. c-span, created in 1989, brought to you as a public service by your television service provider. >> now live a debate between former wisconsin governor tommy
thompson and madison congresswoman tammy baldwin, competing for the seat of retiring senator herb cole. this is courtesy of wmds tv. the cook political report rate this is race a tossup. this is live coverage now on c-span. >> live from the campus of the milwaukee area technical college and the studios of milwaukee public television, the wisconsin broadcasters association foundation presents a statewide broadcast debate between the leading candidates in the 201 u.s. senate election. and now, the president of the wisconsin broadcasters association foundation, john lauer.
>> good evening. we are pleased to continue our public affairs broadcast tradition, sponsoring widely broadcast debates in major wisconsin political companies. this debate will be broadcast on over 0 television stations and nationwide on c-span and the world channel. they will engage the two senate candidates in a debate. former governor tom may thompson and second district representative tammy baldwin. this is made possible in part from generous grants from the independent college and universitys and aarp wisconsin. and now on their behalf, mr. jim reardon, mr. sam wilson. >> good evening, everyone. i'm jim reardon from wps health
insurance. these are my friends, ralph from the independent association of colleges and yuferes and sam wilson, state director of aarp. >> along with wpf and aarp wisconsin, wisconsin's 23 private nonprofit colleges and universitys, and our more than 61,000 students are pleased to sponsor this debate between the major candidates for the u.s. senate. to be competitive in the global knowledge economy, wisconsin needs to expand educational opportunities. this is you are mation at the association. we also believe that good government depends upon an informed and educated public and that a debate can and should be educational. aarp wisconsin has over 800,000 members in the state and over 37 million members nationwide. we are pleased to join in sponsoring this 2012 u.s.
senate debate. aarp has a 25-year history of nonpartisan voter registration and voter engagement. we appreciate you joining us this evening and please visit www.learntosave.org. >> at wps health insurance we've been insuring wisconsin's health since 1946. we have seen our society and government face growing challenges. we hope that our sponsorship of this u.s. senate debate will help you gain a better understanding of how each of these candidates would represent us and govern our nation. please join us in watching the debate and thinking about the future. then make your voice heard by voting on tuesday, november 6. >> the format for tonight' debate will allow for each candidate to make an opening
statement, to respond to questions from a panel of reporters and finally for each candidate to make a closing statement they have order of responses has been previously decided by a coin flip. our panelists include robert kennedy, news director of wta q radio green bay, and john porter. we begin with one and a half minute opening statements. representative baldwin, your opening statement. >> thank you for this opportunity. over the last year, i've traveled this great state, meeting with people who are working hard, playing by the rules and trying to get ahead. unfortunately, for so many, it's been harder and harder just to get by. what's changed hasn't been our work ethic, it's been the rules. today in washington, big, powerful interests, the ones with a whole lot of money and the best lobbyists, get to write their own rules and
there's too many politicians who are eager to help them. people feel that washington isn't listening to the struggles of middle class families and that's why wisconsin needs a senate who will. i've spent my time in washington being a voice for the struggles of middle class families and standing up to powerful interests like wall street, big oil, and the big health insurance companies. my opponent spent his time in washington helping these same powerful interests. i have taken on powerful interests on behalf of ordinary citizens. my opponent has taken on powerful special interests as clients. so ask yourself tonight, who is better to represent the middle class? >> thank you. your opening statement, governor thompson? >> first off, let me thank everybody for being involved
and putting this on. i'm tommy thompson, i was governor of this great state for 14 years. while i was govern york cut taxes 9 times. we gave people -- reformed welfare and gave people an opportunity to work. we built the best health care possible for poor, middle income people all over the state. this acknowledges the best health care in the country. i also was able to be the architect for part d, for medicare, so seniors were able to get drugs. i also work my wife, who is with me tonight, started a women's health foundation. she and my daughter, tommie, set up my health care foundation for the people of the state of wisconsin, for the women of wisconsin. i've always tried to do what was right for wisconsin. i think we've been successful. i lived my whole life with my family in wisconsin. and we were able to create 74 ,000 jobs while i was governor. i'm a reformer.
my opponent is ranked as the number one liberal in the united states house of representatives. that's a pretty hard ranking to get to when you know she is the number one spender in the house of representatives. this is difficult to be able, with all those spenders, to be number one and she has been able to succeed in that capacity. i've always done what was right for wisconsin. and always will. i need your help and i hope that you will support me for the united states senate. >> thank you. our first question will be from robert kennedy, first for governor thompson. >> governor, good evening. >> good evening, robert, how are you? >> i'm good. >> a lot of people in wisconsin come to the state since your time as governor, maybe aren't as familiar with you as others, perhaps the representative from her district isn't as well known around the rest of the state. so one a lot of people are finding out about you now through the campaign ads they see and hear on radio and tv and some of them are pretty
hard against each other. i'd like you to tell me what you think is the biggest or most gross inaccuracy or perhaps outright lie in an ad that your opponent is running against you or an organization that's siding with your opponent's campaign -- opponent and paying for those ads. >> my opponent started out the day after the pry mear, she spent millions of dollars with her and her west wing liberals in washington to try to tear me down. she doesn't have a record to run on. all she can do is try to get the people of the state of wisconsin not to leek me. the truth of the matter is, 90% of the people know me as tommy, not as mr. thompson, not as governor, but as tommy my wife and chern lived their whole life in the state of wisconsin. they're trying to make it out i no longer belong in wisconsin. i run the farm -- i farm in wisconsin, run the family farm. my wife and daughter run a women's health foundation in the state of wisconsin. we have never left wisconsin
and never will. we believe so much in this state and have done so much to make wisconsin the best it possibly can be. you know, i've run positive ads until fenally i have to defend myself. i think that's a mistake. >> representative baldwin, same question. misleading ad against you? >> well, i think it's very similar to what we just heard in my opponent's opening statement. you know, sometimes the definitions that we think, we associate with words like liberal and conservative, the name calling, it gets kind of crazy. i look at how we got into the fiscal mess that we're in right now as a nation. during the bush year well, had two unfunded tax cuts, two unfunded wars, and an enormous unfunded medicare part d benefit in which my opponent gave a sweetheart deal to the drug companies that made it illegal for medicare to bargain for better prices for seniors.
that's by my quick math about $3.5 trillion, unfunded, on the credit card, debt to our children and grandchildren and he calls that conservative? the words have lost their meaning. >> our second question will be from lisa, who will be -- it will be directed fers to representative baldwin. >> congresswoman baldwin, before the end of the year and before either of you is sworn in as a u.s. senator, the nation faces the expiration of the bush era tax cuts and the 2% payroll deduction and a forced spending cut of $100 billion unless congress and president obama do something about it. this has been called the cliff effect. do you think cuts should be allowed to expire? and the $100 billion in spending cuts should be allowed to happen? if not, how would you modify those plans?
>> well, the fiscal cliff as they call it is a very serious issue and it is a result of partisan impasse and gridlock where too many in washington put the interests of their party over the interests of the people. sequestration, as it's called, is indiscriminate and arbitrary across the board cuts. it would devastate our economy. it's not the right prescription. i support the president's plan, a balanced approach. it recognizes we have twin challenges facing us, the need to reduce our debt and the need to energize our economy and we can't have a set of solutions to run -- to one that jeopardizes our ability to tackle the other. i think with investments in education, in research that grow our economy, middle class and small business tax cuts, that's solution. >> governor thompson? >> we're headed for a recession
unless we do something. congress, my opponent's been in congress for 14 years. since she's been in congress, the debt has grown from $6 trillion to $16 trillion. $10 trillion. and she's voted far lot of new spening programs. in fact, she introduced legislation to increase spending with the progressive caucus. and she's voted for 100 and something tax increases. my opponent is a taxer and spender. but the question was, what are we going to do in january? we have got to make sure that we address the taxes. we can no longer afford to allow for these taxes to come into play in january on the sequestration. because if both happen, the c.b.o. has said we are going to end up in a recession. i don't think anybody want to have a recession. but isn't it sad that congress, all the time she's been there, are waiting until january to solve the problem of america? i want to solve it day one. that's why i'm running. >> a third question from john
porter, directed first to governor thompson. >> governor thompson, beyond the cliff effect, we have a $16 trillion debt. >> uh-huh. >> increasing at about $1 trillion a year. the notion that some say we cannot levy any more taxes, you signed the taxpayer protection pledge, grover norquist's pledge, and congresswoman baldwin you said that you like the buffett rule and of course sponsored that, which means taxing rich people more. but you're not going to be able to tax them enough more to get back $16 million. can we really solve this problem, this $16 trillion debt problem, without any new taxes? >> yes, we can. but you've got to be determined and you've got to be able to do what i would like to do. i have the same problem when i came in as governor of the state of wisconsin, john. we were in debt and i came in
and with democrats in control of both houses of the legislature, cut taxes 91 times. we reformed spending in the legislature and the state. we were able to create 742,000 jobs. the biggest increase in jobs ever in the history of our state. we turned the state around. i can to the same thing at the federal level. what do we have to do? we have to put in a balanced budget amendment around then we've got to request that every federal agency comes in with a 5% reduction from what they got the previous year and give the secretaries the opportunity to be able to get rid of programs that don't work. nobody in washington ever gets rid of anything. but if you would give the secretaries who run the departments the opportunity to cut back 5% and get rid of programs, you will see the federal government, just like the state did, run more efficiently and better. >> representative baldwin? >> thank you. let me talk about what i would cut in order to grapple with our deficit and our debt.
i'd end the war, i've worked to end the war in afghanistan which costs us $ billion a week. i would get rid of the sweetheart deal tommy thompson negotiated as head of medicare that makes it illegal for drug companies to bargain with -- medicare to bargain with drug companies for better prices for seniors that one costs us $15 billion per year. i'd get rid of corporate welfare for big corporate farms and big oil. i'd also let the bush tax cuts for the top % expire. i also want to look at the record contrast. i already told you about the policies that tommy thompson supported that added over $3.5 trillion to the debt when president bush was in office. i opposed those irresponsible plans that added to our debt. so now in the future, tommy thompson supports a plan that
adds trillions more in tax cuts for the very wealthy and raises taxes on the middle class. that's the wrong scription for tackling our -- prescription for tackling our debt. >> our next question, from robert kennedy, directed first to representative baldwin. good evening, representative. >> good evening. >> i'd like to ask you about tax deductions. what sort of tax deductions might you be looking at for closing up, eliminating altogether, things like tuition or child care, that type of thing? what do you have in mind for that? >> well, i do think we have a tax system that is very unfair. it's like there's two sets of the rules of the road. one for the well off and well connected and another set for the rest of us. and it's happened over a long course of having powerful interests have too much power in washington and lobbyists writing special privileges. one of the first things -- two of the things i would go after
right away, one is the set of deductions and loopholes that encourage outsourcing of u.s. jobs. and an important one is the very deduction that allows folks to move personnel and equipment overseas and write it off as a business expense. another very important one has to do with a rule called carried interest whereby hedge fund managers can get their compensation taxed at the 15% level. that's why we see presidential candidate on the republican side paying such low taxes. we have to get rid of them to be fair for america. >> governor thompson? >> it's always amazing for me to listen to somebody that blames somebody that's not even in congress for all the problems of congress. i was back in wisconsin creating jobs and l.h.i. when my opponent was in washington spending and taxing to such a
degree. we have to balance the budget and we have to request every department to come in and 5% below. just like i did at the state level. if you want to balance the budget, you have to make some tough decisions. what she's talking about is always trying to find a way to tax somebody else, divide up the classes in america. i'm a builder. i built wisconsin. when i was governor, we cut taxes 91 times. we cut income taxes, we cut the property taxes, the inheritance tax, the gift tax and we created 742,000 jobs. that's what we did in wisconsin. what they did in washington they got 23 million people unemployed and underemployed. that's their accomplishment. pleat difference of philosophy and direction between my opponent and myself. >> our next question is from lisa, directed first to governor thompson. >> this might be something we can all agree on. the approval ratings of congress can't get much worse than it is right now.
the lack of productivity would be a problem for the rest of us in our jobs. most people believe things have to change in the way congress operates. do you believe any change to the structure, for example, term limits, or the 60% filibuster rule in the senate, do you think any changes should be made? if so, please name them specifically. >> well, listen, first off, what you've got to do is sit town and talk. when i was governor and the democrats controlled the legislature in both houses for 12 1/2 out of my 14 year well, plibbed great things. why? because i sat down with the other side. we reached an agreement. we cut taxes. we changed welfare. giving people hope and opportunity. we built wisconsin. what happens in washington? everybody, my opponent is -- even her party doesn't pass any legislation. because she is so far out there. she's not in the mainstream. what we have to do is we have
to be willing to talking willing to discuss, and willing to reach an agreement. the 60% rule in the u.s. senate should be done away with it. being able to put a mark in so that somebody doesn't get approved, those are yesterday's procedures. all those procedures in the united states senate should be modernize sod that 52%, 51%, 50% of the people in the senate can make policy and move this country forward. >> representative baldwin? >> i certainly agree that congress has gotten too partisan and certainly has lost etc. civility and i find that regrettable. i have always had great success in reaching across the party aisle and getting things done, both in my time in the state legislature and my time in the congress. some may not believe that tommy thompson once signed into law a
tammy bald when-scot walker bill. in congress i've worked to advance disability legislation for blinded veterans with congressman -- republican congressman, now senator, john bozeman. i worked with sue myrick, a republican, who passed the serb call cancer -- cervical cancer early diagnosis law. i agree there ought to be real reform in the senate. i think members of congress shouldn't get paid if they don't pass a budget. >> our next question will be from john porter, directed fist to representative baldwin. >> representative baldwin, the population projections for wisconsin are fascinating to look at. it says that by 2035, there's going to be a million and a half people like me who will be
65 or older. and that's twice as many as we have in this state in the year 2000. what do you think the social security -- that social security is going to look like for them given that they have been contributing to it for their entire working lives? >> now, i was raised by my grandparents. i am so lucky that they were there for me when i needed them. but i also note i was exposed at a much younger age to the value of both medkear and social security. they provided economic security to my family. i believe they're not just programs but they're promises and promises that we must keep. a few years back, president bush announced a plan to privatize social security. i think about the financial tu multithat our country has just gone through and what would have happened to those
resources had we invested them in the markets. we need to make sure that medicare and social security remain bedrock foundations. social security is not contributing to our debt. we should leave it alone and make the appropriate changes to keep it tissue keep its solvency for years and generations to come. >> governor thompson? >> a good question, john. medicare doesn't start going broke until 2036. we have time to fix it. medicare is going to go bankrupt by 2022. we've got to maintain social security and medicare but it's amazing to me, why i want to run so bad is i want to fecks the problems. my opponent has been in congress for 14 years. has she ever introduced legislation to fix social security? no. has she ever put any legislation in to fix medicare? has any democrat ever put in
legislation to fix social security or medkear? they're going to stand around and wait? until it goes broke. i want you, john, to be able to be sure you'll have social security. that's why i'm running. i'm going to make sure you and all the seen yoffers america are going to be able to have that safety net, the same way i'm running because of the chern and grandchildren in this state so they can inherit a country stronger, freer fairer, safer with a future that's in crisis. nobody solves the problem, i will. that's why i'm running. >> our next question is from robert kennedy to -- directed fers to governor thompson. >> governor, health care or obamacare is certainly a big issue in this campaign across the country. you've been tagged by president obama as being a supporter of the affordable care act and represent the representative voted for it in congress. as we stand here today or sit here todaying your thoughts on
that. are there portions of it that you think should stay? should it be repealed altogether? and what areas should we keep if you think there are parts that are worth saving? >> number one, i started senior care. i changed health care in wisconsin. when i was secretary of health and human services, i was the architect of part d. that's going to allow seniors to have drugs and be able to purchase those drugs. my opponent doesn't believe obamacare goes far enough. she would like to have a single payer, a government takeover. what i want, bob, is i want a health care system that's affordable and accessible. number one, let's base it on quality. number two, let's allow individuals to be able to purchase health insurance over the internet and be able to put in what they want in there. number three, let's do away with the liability problems so doctors have to practice defensive medicine. let's make sure that 18% of the cost of health care which goes
into paperwork, we require insurance companies to have only one form in medicare. 1% of the population uses 20% of the cost. let's make sure they're taken care of and be able to have managed care. we could change this, we could make health care affordable and accessible and obamacare doesn't to that. >> representative baldwin? >> you know, the last thing we need moving forward is to have tommy thompson and others rip up the affordable care act, throw it out and have more years of partisan bickering over this. it is high time that we pull together across the party aisle and put this into full effect and make it work for america and wisconsinites. the effect of tommy thompson ripping up this health care law is very concerning to so many who have already benefited and people who know they will. young people are now on their parents' health insurance up to age 26. i was in a classroom at u.w.
oshkosh the other tai and i asked students to raise their hands if they were covered by their parents' insurance. 2/3's of the room shot their hands up. i'm proud of that because i drafted that particular provision in committee. but people, parents with chern with pre-existing conditions, now know they can get insurance coverage. people who are on medicare now get free preventive care. he would throw all that out and that's irresponsible. >> robert, you have a followup question? >> governor, just so we're clear, there is nothing in the affordable care act right now that's worth maintaining? >> no. right now the affordable care act has 20 taxes increased. we have to do away with the affordable care act, then we can put in things like making sure that the individuals are going to be able to be covered. pre-existing illness can be taken care of. individuals will have control
over their health care and be able to buy a contract. my opponent wants to -- wants the govern to control it. i want you, the individual and state government to be able to determine who is going to be able to be the arbitrators and referees of health care. huge difference. you want the federal government to make a determination who your doctor and hospital is? or the state and individual? i'm with the state and individual my opponent wants the federal government. huge, diametrically opposed. that's what it's all about. there are things like wellness and prevent, bob, that i drafted when i was secretary that are in the affordable care act that absolutely need to be maintained. chronic illnesses is something i started when i was secretary of health. that's not to be maintained and be able to continue. >> representative baldwin? >> well, the last statement about government intrusion in doctor selection is just absurd. the affordable care act when fully implemented will set up
state-based, private health insurance exchanges and people will get help getting full coverage. but what ipped to -- i want to answer is the question, he was asked if there was anything he likes in the bell. how about something that i don't like that was in the bill. and that is that it maintains the sweetheart deal that tommy thompson cut with the drug companies when it became illegal for medicare to bargain for better drug prices for seniors. i would get rid of that. >> our next question is from lisa, directed fers to representative baldwin. >> let's talk a little more about medicare. it's certainly a program that seniors have come to rely on. it's also a program that if modified could actually save the federal budget a lot of money. vice president -- vice-presidential candidate paul ryan has a plan to turn it into a voucher type program. i guess i'd like to hear specifically each of your vigs for the future of medicare. >> well, thank you for that question, lisa. i've already mentioned the fact
that i got to see the difference that medicare makes in people's lives at a much earlier age than most do because i was raised by my grandparents. and my grandmother was on medicare by the time i was in my late teens. this is something that i regard as more than a program but a promise an one that we must keep. my opponent supports a plan to end medicare as we know it, to instead give seniors vouchers that outside, nonpartisan analysts have said will encrease out of pocket expenses for seniors over the first decade up to $6,000. and i know very few wisconsin seniors who can afford that sort of burden. we need to continue what we did in the affordable care act that
extended medicare's solvency by nearly a decade. >> governor thompson. >> it's amazing to me that she has the audacity to say i did this, i'm not even in congress. i'm a private sector. i believe what needs to be done, we got to protect medicare but all the years that my opponent spent in weak, 14 years, she never introduced one bill to save medicare. all shezz does is blame somebody else. she wants to criticize. i want to fix medicare. i want to make sure that the seniors in america and wisconsin are going to have coverage. and i want to make sure we do it in the right way. medicare goes broke in the year 2022. it is $42 trillion in debt right now. there's no way that it's going to be able to continue unless we modify it and change it. i believe that ron white, a democrat and paul ryan, a republican have got the first step. i would go further. i would put medicare, before it
goes broke, allow seniors and individuals to be able to continue to be covered by medicare but after that, be able to be put into the federal health program the same way she gets her health insurance right now. it was good -- if it's good enough for the congress why isn't it good enough for the seniors? that's the difference. it's not a voucher pral. you're allowing seniors to have continuation of health care. >> thank you governor. our next question is from john, first to governor thompson. >> i'm certain you saw israeli prime minister netanyahu holding up his cartoon bomb in the u.n. earlier this week. kind of disturbing to a lot of american i'm sure but israel says if iran moves closer to building nuclear weapons it's going to do what it sees if it to protect itself an our policy over the years would indicate that the u.s. would respond militarily if israel asked us.
is keeping iran from becoming a nation with nuclear weapons worth putting u.s. troops in harm's way? >> it's necessary to prevent iran and ahmadinejad, who is an individual that is somewhat mentally impaired, who believes that the holocaust never existed, believes that israel should be destroyed and has threatened america that they're going to blockade the gulf of hormuz. which would block all the oil going worldwide, it would enter us into a world depression. sooner or later, unless we draw the red line that netanyahu wants, we're going to have the problem of iran having a nuclear bomb. we cannot afford that. it will end up in a world war. we've got to stop them. my opponent in 2006, 2009 and 2010 voted against the sanctions of iran. only now three months before the election she's now for them. and i believe that it's time for us to draw the red line and
say, no more ahmadinejad. we are going to stop and you are not going to have a nuclear bomb. we cannot afford to allow that individual and that cupry to have a nuclear bomb. >> representative baldwin? >> iran's nuclear ambitions are a threat to the united states, a threat to the region, a threat to our allies, including israel and especially israel for which it is an existential threat. it's a threat i take very seriously. iran must not become capable of creating a nuclear weapon. i support the president, who has said that all options remain on the table. i believe this is an area where we have to stand united as americans on this foreign policy. i have voted for tough and biting sanctions against iran and believe that that process needs to continue to play
itself out. all options on the table, but i also would never frivolously, not quite the right word. i would never without thoughtful plans send our men and women into harm's way without an exit strategy and an assurance we are going to be effective. >> our next question is from robert kennedy, directed first to representative baldwin. >> representative, the situation in afghanistan, american troops being killed by the people that they're training to provide security forer that country, some of those training missions now have been put on hold at least temporarily. how in your opinion, should americans continue to be at risk in that environment? is it too unstable of an environment for effective security exercise to continue? your thoughts on that. >> i appreciate that question.
in 2001, i voted to authorize use of mill tear force in afghanistan. in the days and months following the nen attacks on the united states. it was a very clear and focused megs to go after those who planned and executed that attack. and i believe our brave men and women who went to afghanistan, very capably fulfilled that mission, frankly in fairly short order. i was in afghanistan in august of 2010, in kabul and at bagram air force base. i met with wisconsin soldiers and -- soldiers and folks in the military from the senior ranks to the tissue to those coming back from forward operating bases. you would be so proud of those men and women, but the mission today this nation building mission, is not the one that was authorized. it is now time for them to come
home. >> governor thompson? >> my opponent just, i think, misstated. she said she voted for the sanctions against iran. she voted against the sanctions in 2006, 2009, and 2010 and in august she voted for them because she was running for the united states senate. complete change of heart. in regards to afghanistan, ladies and gentlemen, i got my training from colin powell he always taught me this. he said, tommy if we're going to go to war, have a plan and have a reason to go to war. number two, make sure that if you go to war, you have the necessary fire power to win. overwhelmingly. and number three have an exist strategy. we do not have the desire to when an we do not have an exit strategy. we should get out of after fan stan. i have been to afghanistan four times. i built a hospital for women and children in kabul. i opened it up in -- over easterner 2004.
and it was one of those humanitarian things that i've been involved in. but we need to get out of afghanistan now. >> robert? followup? >> yes, thank you. a quick followup. for the record then, is there no useful purpose for u.s. troops to be in afghanistan, representative, in your opinion? >> 30 seconds. >> at this point, we are there engaged in war. the mission i believe has been completed and completed successfully in short order. the nation building, the building of hospitals in afghanistan when we have nation building needs at home is not sufficient reason and we need to bring our troops home. >> our next question is from lisa, directed first to governor thompson. >> a major reason that u.s. lyes are put at stake in that region, bringing it home, i would like to know your thoughts on developing more
energy alturntives in this country offshore drilling, oil from federal lands that sort of thing. >> when i was secretary, i went up to anwr, up in alaska. i had to go up to take care of the alaska data. i found out that the area we want to drill in anwr is about 2,000 acres in 30,000 square miles. it's like putting a postage stamp on a football field. we can drill and drill correctly. they say the caribou walk through. the caribou are smart enough to walk around. the environmentalists may not be but the caribou are. we can trill up there effectively bringing that oil down to member america. the keystone pipeline which my opponent is opposed to, swell the president, i've been thereupon. they have more tar sands oil than we need in america for the next 25 years. and all they want to do is build a pipeline down through the dakotas, down to houston to refine the gas.
we can do that. we've got natural gas. we produce more natural gas than saudi arabia. i'm fed up to -- with sending money to opec. i want us to be energy endependent and we can do it by drill, natural gas and building the pipeline. >> representative baldwin? >> certainly becoming energy independent of mid east oil is necessary for our economy as well as our national security. and so i think we have to have an all hands on deck approach to this. i think we can to a lot, in terms of extraction, having a use it or lose it policy. tommy talks about opening up anwr for drilling when it would only produce a six-month supply and we have oil companies right now that are sitting on leases for years and years, and not using them. use it or lose it. we can to a lot more with efficiency. we can do a lot more also with
new energy and homegrown energy. there's so much happening in wisconsin an me -- and the midwest that's creating new jobs. that's the direction we need to go in. >> our next question is from john, directed fers to representative bald when. >> there are prome some people watching us who are out of work, others who are watching us who used to have jobs that paid better. in a lot of ways, i think this election is about jobs. it's all -- it's been part of every answer. president obama has indicated that he believes the public sector can create jobs and help the economy. his opponent says that by helping the private sector, that will create jobs and help the economy. where do you stand on the public sector creating jobs? >> representative bald when,
you're first. >> that is the critical question in this election. people are going to vote based on who has the plans to get our economy moving again to get better jobs. i believe that government can do things to foster private sector job development. let me talk about the basic investments we need to protect in order to do that. it's education, it's research and enknow veags, it's infrastructure. and unfortunately, my opponent is supporting a budget plan that, because he's giving such huge tax breaks to the very wealthy and raising taxes on middle class and small businesses, they're slashing those very investments that i think are essential to our growth. the other thing i think is important is in wisconsin we make things. manufacturing is part of the backbone of this state. i have a manufacturing agenda that doesn't cost much money at all, if any, but are the right policies to get us growing and making things again. >> governor thompson?
>> when you don't have a record you attack the other person. i'm not in congress, you are. i'm in the private sector creating jobs. look at what i did at governor. i was governor for 14 years. we had high unemployment when i came in. i cut taxes 91 times. we grew this state by 742,000 jobs. we went down to unemployment below 2%. i'm a reformer. i get things done. i don't criticize the other side. i make sure things happen. and regards to what's going on, my opponent and baracobama, they want to increase food stamps and unemployment. i want to cut taxes, i want to get the individuals going, i want the private sector to create jobs and opportunities. there's plenty of money available for individuals to put into the marketplace. there are -- they're afraid because they don't know the direction of this election -- that this election is going to
go. i am confident we can do better in america like i did as governor of wisconsin. >> our next question from robert kennedy directed first to governor thompson. >> i want to talk about a social issue. abortion, specifically. can you talk about what your position on abortion would be and how much federal dollars need to be spent on that? >> i am, i've always been, and will always be pro life. i do have exclusions for the life of a mother, rape and incest. but i am pro life and always have been and always will be. and i believe that's the correct policy. i believe that's what is needed in america today. >> representative baldwin. >> i support the decisions in roe v. wade. and also believe, as a majority of wisconsinites do, that abortion should be rare and
safe. i understand this is a very difficult topic. it's wrenching for some to grapple with it. but i think that important life decisions have to be left to women in consultation with their families, doctor, clergy. these are difficult issues. but part of the question was, what sort of there ares should be involved at the federal level? and as we debated the health care law, there have been certainties that there will be no taxpayer dollars spent on the abortion procedure. >> follow whereupon? >> governor, staying with the social issue theme, same-sex marriage, some states are allowing, some are having civil unions, in place of that. what's your stand on that?
>> 71 out of counties voted for a constitutional amendment in wisconsin. i support those 71 counties. that same-sex marriage is not legal in the state of wisconsin. i support that. it's an issue left up to the states and that's where it should be. >> representative baldwin? >> i believe in principles of equality and i certainly support marriage equality. i recognize what the voters of wisconsin decided back in 2006. we know that every year people are thinking about this issue and changing their minds. i was very moved when i saw the president's interview in which he talked about his journey to support marriage equality. he talked about the parents of his daughter's friends, he talked about meeting soldiers serving our country. he talked about all of the
conversations along the way that got him to cheage his mind. tissue to change his mind. i think that's what is happening across america. >> your time has expired, representative baldwin. our next question is from lisa, directed first to representative baldwin. >> my next question focuses on the environment, a new study that came out said asian carp could infest all five of the great lakes within 20 years. what do you feel the federal government can do, particularly you as a u.s. senator, to help avert a disaster? >> representative baldwin. >> thank you. invasive species are a particular threat to the watters that we cherish so much and in particular, there's great concern that asian carp, especially entering the lake michigan through the area in chicago, is going to present a
threat. i think that we have to foster cooperation between the great lakes states. unfortunately, we've had a little trouble on this one with illinois' cooperation but that's how we're going to do this, only if we work together. you know if wisconsin moves forward or michigan moves forward but illinois doesn't, we're going to have issues. so the great lakes compact was one i strongly supported but we need to have special compacts relating to invasive species that threaten our precious waterways. >> governor thompson? >> i'm sur surprised. -- surprised. the first time i haven't been blamed for something or george bush. you know, the truth of the matter is, we've got to stop it. i mean there's no dilly-dallying around it. this carp infestation gets into the great lakes it well ruin our fisheries. there's no ifs, and or buts
about it. we have to demand they seal that and put wire netting up there and seal that canal as best as we possibly can. we got to convince the army corps of engineers and the great lakes governors and the states that this is something that is devastating to our future. the great lakes are an important asset for all the great lakes states, especially wisconsin. we cannot tolerate or allow the asian carp to get in there. so we have to use the power of the senate, the army corps of engineers, the house of representatives, the presidency and all the commissions in order to stop it. there's no turning back. this is a stake in the ground and we got to stop it. >> we have time for one final question. it will be from john, directed first to governor thompson. i am sorry, i have to ask you to limb your response to 0 seconds. >> that's not fair.
>> the obama administration, said that the single most important thing -- a republican leader said the single most important thing we want to achieve is for president obama to be a one-term president. almost indicating he will not give any compromise. if the president elected is not your party and you're elected to a senate seat to what extent will you adopt that approach? >> i'm a reformer. i was keeling -- dealing with the democrats who controlled both houses 12 out of my 15 years. i think it's important for us to make sure we do everything we can do to confront the problem and not postpone them leek my opponent has been doing for the last 14 years. we've got to confront them, we've got to solve the problems. i'm going to work bipartisanly with anybody who wants to work to solve the problems. i do not want us to continue on
and debate and tear down, demagogue each other. i want us to solve america's problems an move this country forward. >> representative baldwin, 30 seconds. >> thank you. i will support the president and command for the chief no matter what party that individual belongs to because we're americans first. and it's high time that we put partisan, the next election and partisanship behind and put the people's business first. but i also think that it's time to stop looking at decades past about what my opponent did in the past in the 1970's and 1980's. what's important is he signed a pledge to a washington, d.c. lobbyist, grover norquist, rather than taking a pledge to the wisconsin people. that's why we have partisan fights in washington. it shouldn't be that way. >> thank you. that concludes the question and
answer portion of our debate. each candidate will now have the opportunity to make a one and a half minute closing statement. governor thompson? >> thank you very much for watching and listening to tonight. our country is in crisis. the reason i'm run, ladies and gentlemen, is because i have three great children and eight grandchildren. i'm running for them and for your children and grandchildren. the country can no longer afford not to confront the problems. my opponent has been in congress for 14 years. she has become and ranked as the most liberal member of the house of representatives. she has voted for 150-something tax increases. i cut taxes 91 times. i reformed welfare completely so poor people would have a chance to have a job and be able to get ahead in life. i'm a reformer, ladies and gentlemen. my wife and i have worked very hard to do the best for wisconsin and we always will. we've lived our whole lives here and we are concerned about the future generations. i want to make sure that your
children and grandchildren out there are going to be able to inherit that country, this country with stronger, freer, fairer, safer, with more options than what we had. right now the direction that's being led with more taxes, more government regulations, a government control of health care, which is being advocated by my opponent, would absolutely ruin the kind of america that all of us want to build. we want to become energy independent and safe. we got to drill, we got to build pipelines and we got to create jobs. cutting taxes and reforming the tax system, we are going to be able to allow businesses to grow and prosper and allow children to have a future that's going to be the best in the world. thank you very much and i would appreciate your vote. >> representative baldwin, your one and a half minute closing statement >> thank you, and thank you again for this opportunity. you've had a chance to hear from two very different candidates with two very
different visions for wisconsin's future. i don't believe that we should have two sets of rules, especially in our tax code. that's why i introduced the buffett rule. it says that millionaires and billionaires should have to d their fair share. my opponent is supporting tax cuts, additional trillions of dollars, weighted to the very wealthy and it will increase the middle tax burden by an average of $1,300 per family. that's not my informationing that's the tax policy cent. on economic prior -- center. on economic priorities, i think it's porn we have a balanced approach to moving our economy forward as well as paying down our national debt. it's why i believe we should get out of afghanistan and -- end corporate subsidies to big oil and corporate funds. it's why we should get rid of tommy thompson's sweetheart deal for the drug companies that cost us so dearly.
meanwhile -- meanwhile we have to protect our investments in education and research to help our economy grow. with medicare and social security, i believe they have to be bedrock gearn teed. tommy thompson would voucherize medicare and eliminate for our next generation. i'll be a voice for the people, not for the powerful. if this is what you're looking for in your next u.s. senator, i ask for your vote and i ask you to yone our team. >> thank you. that concludes the debate between wisconsin u.s. senate candidates congressman tammy baldwin and former governor tommy thompson. this debate has been sponsored by the wisconsin broadcasters association foundation through generous grants from the wisconsin association of independent colleges and universitys, wps health insurance and aarp wisconsin. we thank the candidates and we thank our panelists.
over 80 wisconsin television and radio stations have broadcast this debate to ensure that every citizen has had the opportunity to hear and see the major candidates running for the senate in wisconsin. on behalf of wisconsin's radio and television broadcasters, tammy baldwin and tommy thompson, thank you for listening and watching. [captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2012] >> tomorrow, vice president joe biden campaigns in fort myers, florida. our live coverage begins at 11:40 a.m. eastern on c-span. >> my opponent and his running mate are big believers in top down economics. now, they basically think if we just spend another $5 trillion on tax cuts that favor the very wealthy -- don't boo.
vote. vote. vote. >> he's got one new idea. i admit he has one thing he did not do in his fers four years he said he'll do in the next four years, to raise taxes. is there anybody who thinks that raising taxes will help grow the my? >> no. >> his plan is to continue what he has done before. the status quo has not worked. we cannot afford four more years of barack obama. we're not going to have four more years of barack obama. >> wednesday, president obama and mitt romney meet in their first presidential debate. the news hour's jim lehrer moderates from the university of denver. watch and engage with crmbing span including our live debate preview at 7:00 p.m. eastern, the debate at 9:00 and post-debate your reactions. follow on c-span, c-span radio and online at c-span.org.
>> september 11, 2001, was a day that change midlife forever. it changed america's life. i'm going to go through a power point presentation which is going to outline the account of the historical account of the attack as things happened, as things transpyred that day. it gets -- transpired that day. et gets intense. i'm going to do my best not to ramble on and go too fast. i would ask you to sit back, leer your mind, put yourself in that room an you'll get a real sense of what it was like to be at the too much the food chain, the national command authority, as a nation of 300 million americans was attack by 19 al qaeda terrorists. >> more from retired lieutenant colonel robert darling inside the president's bunker, this weekend on american history tv. sunday at 7:30 p.m. eastern and pacific on c-span3. >> see the first of the presidential debates next wednesday.
live on c-span. c-span radio and c-span.org. watch and engage. next, women reportest talk about the 2012 campaign. then, homeland security secretary janet napolitano on cybercurt. -- on cybersecurity. that's followed by bia discussion on how businesses are dealing with cybersecurity threats. now women political reporters discuss the presidential race and how the news business has changed. they include "washington post" columnist kathleen parker, msnbc's chris jansing and reporters from news however on pbs and >> we are going to start. this is our subterfuge to keep ahead. we will eat later. on time.
i want to talk about our noisemaker lunch's end where they came from. we started those by celebrating a story that we used to do in the december issue called the noisemakers where we pick and women that made a lot of noise every year. the idea would be that they may not be the goody goody people, but they were out there rocking the boat, saying things that were important, shaking things up and changing your opinions. what we found was that all of our noisemakers sort of worm their way into all the pages of the magazine. all the women of style and substance are noisemakers, and they are always bugging convention and they refused to sit down and be quiet. what we said was, our readers love to see real women. there is probably not a model in the magazine at all.
in daylight to see them in a close because they can relate. we don't have any models in the magazine anymore and what we decided to do, who are the most important people this month out there making noise? we decided all these great women covering politics one way or the other recovering journalism. it we are doing print, tv, media, and wanted to cover the whole range. we went all of our great friends and so many of them said yes and give us time, which is really hard to get. we are grateful for them to be here. the idea behind every woman here is that our motto is to walk quietly and carry a big megaphone. i will introduce them from my left. when we get to about 1:30, and nora has to run out and do the other part.
we will do a little bit of talking and will open up to the floor. a bunch of them have gray nail polish. we discussed panty hose, grey nail polish. i as left out. kathleen parker, the syndicated columnist for the washington post. chris jansing, host of msnbc's jansing and company. host of the pbs news hour, and they more contributing editor. maggie haberman, and nora o'donnell. we will give a shout out to helene cooper who is in the piece and had to be on the bus today. and our last best can't be here today.
and we are sad about that. i want to start with a few questions, but i really want asked after sitting here next everybody finding out that it is a very incestuous group and they all have secrets about each other. i'm going to be kind and stick to our point which was talking about the election. given the explosion of social media today, as we know, we had to take our second round of photos not just for prints, but the photographer moved out and everybody went out there. how is it easier or harder to do your job today covering candidates? what kind of pressure does that put on your business? john bed and i will ask laura to start.
>> when you talked about sharing secrets, chris looked over. like, i know a lot about you, nora. we go way back. i was probably one of the first people on twitter, and i think it has helped to gather information, it has helped share different reporting and follow different people to see what kind of different things they are writing or talking about. i think it is useful in that regard, almost like a wire feed. in those days, you have the politics wire and you follow different things. this is replacing the wire ft. what makes it more difficult is their intent to be a narrative that develops because of social media that may not necessarily
represent the truth that is out there and it can be very difficult for a political candidate or someone else to break out of the narrative whether it is fair or unfair. >> i think that is exactly right. twitter is so selective. it is not like the wire services, the information put out by whoever, this is, i am following this person. you create your own world and it becomes hard for those reporters and campaigns to recognize that these 7000 people are not necessarily 7000 voters in ohio or paying that much attention. i think that has become a problem. it certainly helps in terms of aggregating information fast. but you will hear things like campaign aides saying that a reporter told them that i had to cover this because it was blowing up on twitter. >> so many other things have become obsolete. they stand around the water cooler, spending 10 or 50 minutes.
if i am watching one of the debates, i am getting tweets from these people, and i think especially for those of us that do politics, people know who they can trust. people that are politically active and involved, even those in the business, we follow people that we all have good insights. i will be looking at what the other women here are saying and think that as a great idea, or i wish they would ask the question now. for everybody, in the way that it is positive, it is an amazing opportunity for getting information and discussion going. obviously, there is a downside as well.
but it has not only extended our reach but expanded our change of ideas because we don't see each other all the time. >> it makes the world smaller at for the voters we are trying to hear from a different battleground states, it is an opportunity to hear from people as they are meeting the president or governor rodney. -- romney. you might learn that instantaneously in a way that you could not do that before. >> i guess it is appropriate that i be the contrary in. dodge that is why we have you. >> i belong to a different generation and i signed up for twitter a couple years ago because i wanted to write about it. i wanted to see how many followers i would get. as a print person, i have a hard
time seeing it with a straight face. i do follow some news people, but i kind of forget about it. i will come on and go, what am i going to do? i can get in the hot tub. i followed during the day and i find that i will sometimes say something and i always regret it. leading makes me feel a little bit cuter than i need the, and typically, i am at home with the laptop and the wine glass next to me. i have a sign on my desk that says do not drink and dissent. -- do not drink and send. i thought the world was coming to an end when george stephanopoulos interviewed john mccain on a twitter feet. a 140 character interview with a presidential candidate. so it has come to this.
>> i am waiting for college applications done that way. >> is fabulous, in real time, where you can see what is happening on the ground in that moment. in an emergency, i always make sure that my twitters he is handy in case. my real concern is that everything is up so much, and so distilled, that it affects everything we do. i think taste is the enemy of accuracy. to often, stories get going as a result of somebody just to leading something and you have to treat it seriously. suddenly it is growing and you fast forward a couple of days and everything calmed down and we get to the truth of the
matter. as a print person, i tried to remind myself, way. it is always better to way, and i have that luxury. >> the political candidates, it is a way for them to bypass the media. they don't need to talk to us, they can go directly to the voter. >> speaking of that, the questions that a lot of people keep asking over and over again, we did a great piece where you talk about the foibles of the mostly men that are running for different offices. the idea that anything is possibly private today. when you see the iphone at the private dinners, private e-mail to expose, do you know why any
candidate out there who would ever say that anything they say or do or write or believe is private? >> if you talk to people including women candidates, is a much bigger issue for them. when you talk to women about why they don't want to run for office even though they may be very committed to certain policies and positions and be in a position to actually serve, one of the things they don't like about is that you really don't have that space anymore. i think there is a great concern about that that people can't have anything they say or do be off the record anymore. we respect that as journalists, that is what we take very seriously. i have talked to people who have been trying to recruit women candidates for office and they say, it is a major concern for a lot of women out there and they don't want their kids exposed to it. every potential first lady i have ever interviewed has brought that up. i remember talking to laura bush and she said, i'm sorry
i'm late. she had just had a conversation with hillary clinton. in one of her big concerns was the girls. i have the twins. for women, it resonates differently. >> i was speaking to a group of women business leaders, and one of the things i was talking about was for 30 years, women have been going to college at the same rate and women don't have educational parity. we are getting more the agencies and more female doctors. business schools are not yet there, but if you talk about all postgraduate education, women are leading man getting those types of degrees.
there is no longer an educational gap, but you have an ambition gap. why is it the women are not interested going to those businesses or going into politics? she said, i think the reason now, with the first decrease in the generation of what women in the house of representatives. women are mostly democratic candidates for democratic politicians, but what mother said that i think it is because of social media. my teenage daughters don't want to run for school president because they are embarrassed about what people will say about them and people can say we are not going to vote for her because she is dating somebody. women are more sensitive to that kind of criticism. it is an interesting thing to look at, all these private things about yourself and what it has to do with women that want to seek positions of power.
>> i hadn't even thought about that, but to add another dimension, the media is tougher on women. we are sitting up here making sure our legs are crossed right, holding our hands right, and men don't have to worry about that. if you get captured on a snapshot or some overheard conversation, it is humiliating. i don't know why anyone would submit to a political campaign, but particularly women. >> just think about the enormous things in your life. you might have a picture of yourself from five years ago that still exists, there are things of your life on display. i've talked to a lot of young women, aspiring journalists, and everything you do is public. anything can be very careful,
applying for jobs as a representative of the media. >> it is things like what gets over heard, and for me, it is a strange thing because newsroom culture is jokey. the things that reporters is a week other. -- things they say to each other. a new york daily news photographer on the night neil armstrong died, how's armstrong coming? the response was, "dead." it is constantly that kind of thing. anything like that is now our problem. michele bock and did not run a great presidential campaign. but i think that she got a lot of scrutiny that she felt was
not something that any of the other candidates would have faced. perez de attention to rick perry's back surgery than there -- there was less attention to rick perrry's back surgery than there were to a story about her headaches and her migraines. there is a sensitivity to how women get treated and hillary clinton would be the standard for that. i don't know what it would have been like if she ran this year as opposed to 2000. they focus on her looks, her past, her way. it is daunting. >> for some question, i write a woman's magazine, and when people listen to me, they go, what is with their hair? how would i know? gosh we heard that josie told her to grow our hair. >> i have this conversation with a friend of mine, talking about
how she was presenting some of that and they talked about her hair and she said, scott. -- stop. just stop. she is an actor is that had a hit series at one time several years ago, and she always looks perfect what i see her. it is a little bit daunting and i say to her, she always looked perfect. the only picture that they want of me now is where i look bad or embarrassing. that is part of the dynamic. as women, we need to reject that dynamic and not play into it as much as we possibly can. got to battle lost nora, but if you could be un-pc, was one question you would want asked the candidates? >> is not about wanting to know something private, is getting
them off of talking points. i haven't covered governor romney very closely, but the president going to do and off the record chat or when he traveled to berlin, he did it better in 2008 before he was elected president. i learned a little bit about him and i can't use that in my reporting, but it helps understand what makes a person tick because it helps you communicate what this person might do for the country, whether that is good or bad. i ask if he had read this job and francine barack. an amazing book, and we ended up having this 45 second conversation. it was the first time i had
heard him say something that wasn't structured and helped me get a little inside hot about what makes him tick. >> we want candidates to be unguarded and we talk about the realities of this political war in terms of social media. in a candid conversation is always off-the record. there are some politicians that are very hard to get to know even off the record. by all accounts. i i have not interviewed him one-on-one, but governor romney as one of them. when senator obama was running for president, i remember waiting for him outside, a colleague from the daily news, we were standing outside of the ballroom. he talked to us and it was not -- the parallel was hillary who was also running for president
and we could not get within 20 feet of her. some of that was secret service said being a former first lady. it is interesting. we haven't quite figured out how to make it work where everything is documented in the age of social media. >> the last thing that they want you to know anyway, right? dodge the question is why, and -- >> part of the question is why, and to answer because they feel like the things they say will be taken out of contact. 00 context. -- taken out of context. everyone now knows how to edit. when i started in television, it was a big thing to edit something.
now, why 12-year-old can do the million times better and faster than i can. technology has changed so much the way we do our jobs, but the way politicians do their jobs. somebody said, i wish somebody would just say, what is it that you are afraid of if you tell me what you really think? it is a great question, but they have pulled everything and parsed everything, and there is a lot of fear that a videotape is going to come out where you say something about 47% of the people. >> i was thinking about this as we were talking. i don't know that you have the expectation of privacy at a fund-raiser. privatee having a conversation with someone, i
think you would hope that they are not secretly taping it. thei don't take that as same as necessarily having a one-on-one conversation or having a more private exchange with someone. one of the reasons that made that interesting was how different his responses were and how engaged you was. it has a campaign that has been very focused on fund-raising. to me, it was interesting. he clearly had a problem with that, and obviously, the campaign hopes that a daughter is going to do that. but i feel like that as a way station between the five of us having coffee vs 100 people at a fund-raiser. >> i was thinking about what i can say. i once had a conversation with
president obama that comes close to asking a question that what would not ordinarily asked. >> i knew you would do it. >> it was at the white house and there were five or six of us journalists called in to have a conversation. i am pretty sure it was on the record. >> it is now. >> he is actually less impenetrable at times that many other candidates. he can sometimes talk in a way that you feel like you're talking to real human being. he was saying, i am not so concerned about the economy. i think the economy is going to come around. the thing that keeps me awake at night is the psychological makeup of the country.
this partisan tension and at that time there was a lot of tea party activity going on. a lot of deadlock in the congress. i personally, am fascinated by human motivations, and you always want to get to that if you can, in an interview. when he said that, talked about the psychology, president obama, i am right there with you. i think we all may be on the couch. i want to know who has been to a shrink. the best thing in the world is to get to talk about the things that matter most to you and have somebody give you feedback that is useful. i asked him, had you ever talk to anyone about that? i could see the wheels turning and i am not even thinking about that question right here. >> back?
-- next? >> how did he feel about that? >> i had a feeling that if we were back in college, we would have a really good conversation. >> he had been asked 20 questions and it was all about the news of the day. my mother had been interested in the new earth series. we had had this conversation about what the philosophy was behind it. i asked him if he recognized it and he said that he had not read that. his staff was e-mail me, what kind of crazy question? it was the last question, it wasn't televised. i felt like i would learn a little bit about him if i had known that. my mom was very happy.
>> what is the most outrageous thing you have done for a scoop? tell us the truth. or you could make it out. you can tell us what what of these people have done that you have heard of. >> i will defer. >> this was a long time ago, i was trying to get an interview with the prince of spain. i was in my 20s and a reporter. i do speak spanish, thought, perfect, i'll get a one-on-one interview. there is a big ball that night and i was not invited, but i was determined to go. how not what you wear, is you wear it. i went to a store, i went shopping in saint augustine and didn't have anybody back then, so i went looking for a ball
gown. i found three, and i bought the old one that looked reasonably decent that was this red tiered thing, perfectly awful looking. i went into the restaurant, put the dress on, he walked into it. >> in iowa, it was new year's eve, turning to 2008 right before the caucuses and i worked for a paper that was pretty small and the team did not care that much about it so i was never getting access to stocks. i go to this restaurant that everybody goes to. i was going to go there for lunch, i was by myself, and there are all these national
political journalists that were about to meet the obama campaign for an off-the-record lunch. are you here for the launch, i looked at everybody, and i said, yes. i sat down and i think we had some bloody mary's and it was great. i never confessed, and now i just did. not that i got a great story, but i will be here. >> i think it was easier in local news because covering a kw who you were. if you are standing around somewhere and somebody would come out to you, you knew who they were, and if you just have to ask innocuous questions that got you information that would put you in the right place, i did not think that was such a bad waste of anonymity. bad waste of anonymity.